Iron County register., 1887-12-22

IL viii DS Seeu Judb lOr TIE twenty
years succeeding 1860 the Republican
vote showed an uninterrupted growth.
This growth was naturally less in
1864, because of the war, than in 1868,
and was again less in 1872 than in 1868,
because, after the October elections of
the former year had insured Greeley's
overwhelming defeat, the Republicans
were under no necessity of polling a
full vote in November. But aside from
the two exceptional contests of 1864
and 1872, it is obvious that the Repub-
lican vote in these five States was in
creasing at the rate of more than 100,.
600 every four years. the growth from
1872to 1876 being 1O7, 181. and from
1876 to 1880, 13O.7O7. Each State
showed a remarkable steadiness in
growth. New York increased her Re-
publican vote from 1872 to 1876 by 49,
469, and from 1876 to 1880 by &c. 337;
Indiana, by 21,864 in the first period
and "a, 153 in the second; New Jersey,
by 11.S61 and 17,03S; Connecticut. by
1896 and S,037; and Massachusetts, by
16. 591 and 1912.
Beginning with the campaign which
resulted in Lincoln's electio down to
and including that in which Garfield
was the successful nominee, the Re-
publican party had appealed to the
country with honest candidates upon
a pla torn of sound principles. The
result was a steady and rapid growth
in its numbers, averaging from ten to
fifteen per cent. every four years in
States like those we have cited, where
a large proportion of the voters are
not held fast by party bonds. If the
campaign of 1884 had been made upon
the same basis as previous ones, the
Republican vote might have shown Il
marked gain in each of these States
and aggregated at least ], ,25O, 900.
But new policy was adopted. A
tainted candidate was selected who, it
was known and conceded, would re-
pei many old voters who had supported
Lincoln, Grant, Hayes and Garfield, as
well as many young voters whose edu-
cation and environment inclined
them to support Republican nominee
of the old type; but who. it was
claimed, could poll vast number of
votes drawn from the most ignorant
and fantastic elements of the Depocrat-
ic party. He did draw those votes. His
friends assert, and his opponents do
not question, that he received 10000
Irish Democratic votes in New York
City and many thousands more in
Brooklyn and other large cities of this
Sfoko To coooly of ,,Ic
more in New Jersey, Connecticut,
Massachusetts and Indiana. But where
did the gain of these tens of thousands
of Democratic votes, which Garfield
had not secured, put Blaine? In New
York State Garfield had polled sc. 337
votes more than Hayes, and secured
21,033 plurality; Blaine polled only
6.457 more than Garfield, and was
beaten by 1,O47 plurality. In Indiana
Garfield had polled "a, 153 votes more
than Hayes, and secured 6. 642 plurality.
Blaine polled only 5000 more than
Garfield, and was beaten by 6,527
plurality. In New Jersey Garfield
had polled 17,O3S votes more than
Hayes, and reduced the Democratic
plurality to only 2,O1O; Blaine polled
only 2,S11 more than Garfield, and
allowed the Democratic plurality to
rise to 4, Alp. In Connecticut Garfield |
had polled S,O37 votes more than
Hayes, and secured 1856 plurality;
Blaine reduced the Republican vote
from 81, ,071 to 65, 923, and was beaten |
by 1876 plurality. In Massachusetts
Garfield had polled 15,142 votes more
than Hayes, and secured 50, 245 plural
ity, with clear majority over all of
4S, S98; Blaine reduced the Republican |
vote from 165, POS to 146, 724, and had |
only 24.372 plurality, while he fell |
1884 short of any majority at all.
Thus in three of the five States Blaine |
had gained only a trifle over Garfield,
and in the other two had actually lost, |
so that the aggregate Republican vote
in them, which normal growth should |
have carried up to at least 100000 |
in 1884. was only 1, 1S6, AT, against L.
14O, $50 in 1880. Such figures as these |
draw their own moraL-M y Evening |
Post.